In article <airliners.1995.626@ohare.Chicago.COM> bareynol@cca.rockwell.com (Brian A. Reynolds) writes:
>
>*****
>My Opinions Only!
>*****
>
>The issue should not be with fly-by-wire per se but rather with the human
>factors elements of the flight deck design. Airbus seems to feel that
>informing the flight crew of what the automatic systems are doing to the
>aircraft is not relivent.
There is certainly more awareness of ergonomics these days, as ergonomics
seems to have contributed significantly to each of the A320 crashes. Oper-
ational philosophy, breeding over-confidence--indeed, arrogance--has also
been a factor.
However, to ignore the mushrooming complexity of flight control systems is
a mistake. A pulley and bell-crank system leading to a hydraulic actuator
is a well-understood engineering problem.
Current digital systems in use on civil transports are hideously complex.
>From a few hundred K for the A320, there are over 10M of code in use on the
A330/A340. Manufacturers are not implementing simple, open-ended solutions:
they are implementing highly modal systems to which large number of hacks
are applied to "fine-tune" the systems and overcome design failings.
Never mind the issues of introducing high-density semiconductors into a high-
radiation/high-energy environment.
There is mounting evidence that, theoretically at least, electronic-based
systems are not as reliable as their mechanical equivalents, even with redun-
dancy.
While it is pleasing to see emphasis placed on the current problems of
glass cockpits, it is disturbing to see the FBW component dismissed as a
non-issue.
< steps off soap-box >
--
Robert Dorsett Moderator, sci.aeronautics.simulation
rdd@netcom.comaero-simulation@wilbur.pr.erau.eduftp://wilbur.pr.erau.edu/pub/av